Author [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] [EN] [ZH] [ES] [PT] [IT] [DE] [FR] [NL] [TR] [SR] [AR] [RU] Topic: Delegate Sponsorships  (Read 1151 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline fuzzy

Delegate Sponsorships
« on: November 15, 2014, 09:28:00 PM »

I have kicked around the idea of offering Delegate Slates to help get delegates voted into power who have projects that myself and the Beyond Bitcoin volunteers believe in.  I have also kicked around the idea of offering a limited number of sponsored slots in this slate. 

In return for donating perhaps 5% of their income, we would hold hangouts for these devs and this would help pay the volunteers and the server fees so I do not have to do so out of pocket or rely on (often non-existent) tips. 

I am interested in people's thoughs on allowing this.  I am not saying opinions will necessarily change my mind moving forward with this, but I do want to hear opinions in the case I am missing some valuable insights that might evolve my current solution. 

BROWNIE==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits Welcome to  the Sharing Economy w/ BeyondBitcoin.org Partners--ShareBits.io & OpenLedger.info
TIP FORMAT: #sharebits "ForumHandleInQuotes" Quanity Token_Name

julian1

  • Guest
Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #1 on: November 16, 2014, 12:06:34 AM »
Quote
I have also kicked around the idea of offering a limited number of sponsored slots in this slate.

This is completely contrary to the idea that slate recommendations should comprise an unbiased assessment and set of recommendations by the reviewer. Open to all kinds of abuse in my opinion.

Quote
pay the volunteers

Then they're not volunteers!

Quote
and the server fees

Exactly how much are your server fees? I pay a few dollars a month for EC2 instances, and can obtain research infrastructure IAAS for nothing.

Offline fuzzy

Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #2 on: November 16, 2014, 01:31:03 AM »
Ill answer each point as soon as I can get to my pc.  However, my opinion on the objective aspect of voting for delegate slates with regard to corruption is that the weekly mumble hangouts provide a dynamic environment and opportunity for anyone to whistleblow on a delegate who may be doing something corrupt. It could easily be recorded and posted to the forums to allow the entire weight of the community to gather the facts.  In my eyes, this is far from corrupt.

Also, people get to enter the mumble server to participate in discussions that are completely open with devs. They can ask hardball questions and get them on record in a way completely unique to our ecosystem.  They would be able to do this with or without voting for the slate, but could vote on the slate instead of us relying on tips.  This would free up more time for us to get closer to full time on this.  Of course, they could choose to refrain from voting for the slate and still receive this service...so I am not sure how this is corrupting.  Please give some examples?

(Ill get to the voluteer stuff from my computer so I can isolate your points individually because they are points worth bringing up so the community can know more about this).
BROWNIE==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits Welcome to  the Sharing Economy w/ BeyondBitcoin.org Partners--ShareBits.io & OpenLedger.info
TIP FORMAT: #sharebits "ForumHandleInQuotes" Quanity Token_Name

Offline btswildpig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1423
    • View Profile
Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #3 on: November 16, 2014, 02:40:43 AM »
Quote
I have also kicked around the idea of offering a limited number of sponsored slots in this slate.

This is completely contrary to the idea that slate recommendations should comprise an unbiased assessment and set of recommendations by the reviewer. Open to all kinds of abuse in my opinion.

Quote
pay the volunteers

Then they're not volunteers!

Quote
and the server fees

Exactly how much are your server fees? I pay a few dollars a month for EC2 instances, and can obtain research infrastructure IAAS for nothing.

volunteers also means their income from doing something does not match the value of that service in open market .
这个是私人账号,表达的一切言论均不代表任何团队和任何人。This is my personal account , anything I said with this account will be my opinion alone and has nothing to do with any group.

Offline hpenvy

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 451
    • View Profile
Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #4 on: November 16, 2014, 03:44:31 AM »
Quote
I have also kicked around the idea of offering a limited number of sponsored slots in this slate.

This is completely contrary to the idea that slate recommendations should comprise an unbiased assessment and set of recommendations by the reviewer. Open to all kinds of abuse in my opinion.

Quote
pay the volunteers

Then they're not volunteers!

Quote
and the server fees

Exactly how much are your server fees? I pay a few dollars a month for EC2 instances, and can obtain research infrastructure IAAS for nothing.

volunteers also means their income from doing something does not match the value of that service in open market .

We have volunteer poker dealers left and right in home poker games. Tipping the dealer is optional, however, it can serve a great motivator to come back again next week.
=============
btsx address: hpenvy
Tips appreciated for good work

Offline gamey

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 2253
    • View Profile
Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #5 on: November 16, 2014, 07:12:13 AM »

We have volunteer poker dealers left and right in home poker games. Tipping the dealer is optional, however, it can serve a great motivator to come back again next week.

There is a weird social dynamic which compels people to tip/donate in poker games.  This does not hold true online.  I mean there is some sort of analogy there, but don't see the 2 situation as being very equal.
I speak for myself and only myself.

Offline fuzzy

Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #6 on: November 16, 2014, 03:05:44 PM »

We have volunteer poker dealers left and right in home poker games. Tipping the dealer is optional, however, it can serve a great motivator to come back again next week.

There is a weird social dynamic which compels people to tip/donate in poker games.  This does not hold true online.  I mean there is some sort of analogy there, but don't see the 2 situation as being very equal.

The only way that works is if we dont show up on the weeks we do not get tips.  If that happens, others who have interests more openly aligned with our competitors may also want to jump in to fill the void.  They will not have been tried during the toughest times in this community and will not have proven their loyalties to the underdog that is bitshares.  Or worse they might leave at the first sign they could "make it big" faster by allying themselves with competitors with more resources who rely on the entrenched, centralized power structures that currently exist to promote themselves and their interests. This type of representative might even eventually conclude that town hall style meetups should be retired in exchange for private discussions between pundits and devs, cutting out the little guy and his/her questions/concerns.  We might even see bitshares all over television, but promoted by the same people who caused our financial crisis and are open enemies of freedom.

But the question is...how can anyone be certain the people who intend to fill this void will have the same philosophy that investors big and small should have such priceless access to the developers in whose projects they are investing? The only way to find out for sure is to give them a chance...to take a risk at a time when I honestly do not know the risk is safe to take (of course I may be biased here). 

It is a risk either way. But I assure everyone, we will all pay either way. The question really comes down to how valuable the people who have proven they will work for nothing (or very little) consistently for almost the entirety of the past year are to the community...and what they would be capable of doing with a captial infusion that is consistent and reliable. 

I would prefer to have delegates donate a small portion for sponsorships and in return I and the (expanding) beyond bitcoin crew organize hangouts that anyone can attend for as long as we can have devoted funding to support it. This way the weight of the community can be brought to bare to ask them questions and keep them honest--and this could include altchains.   When the majority of the community likes what they are doing and see their value proposition as worthwhile, they get the stamp of approval. The delegates that get that stamp and want to be seen as foundational to the bitshares community would then see giving a small, consistent donation to have a sponsorship slot as an honor given them by the community. The only benefit to these sponsorship slots being that they are openly advertised as being a proponent of the open and transparent discussions that enable the community vetting process.  Those who remain in power long enough...and support the system's sustainability over time will be seen like the beacons of light in a dark, uncertain sea of possibility.  They will bring stability and trust.

I actually see the hangouts we run as being a potential counterbalance to the problems that arise from large stakeholders having significantly more power than small stakeholders to vote these people into power.  It is the only place where you have all consistently been given a voice and direct contact with devs (and potentially delegates) in a way that produces results...not to mention content that enables anyone interested to become a cryptojournalist without ever having to pay out of pocket or join a club.

Sure these may even grow into large debates in the future...but even that will be historically significant and over time crypto historians and journalists alike will see our hangouts as treasure troves of content ripe for the picking.  And unlike jstor and other archives, these will not require payment to access because the community accepted the responsibility a LONG time ago to ensure they always remained free to the public. 

This is COMPLETELY unique to the system we are building...the one that started in bitshares community...and will always be recognized as such.  How can any other crypto compete with this vision?

My question, then, is does the community value this vision enough to support those who would work for chump change, for free, or pay out of pocket to see that vision fulfilled.  I can tell you for certain where I stand...and I, gamey, and joeyD have a pretty solid archive to prove it already.

Still interested in opinions though :)

P.S. julian..thanks for being open and honest with your opinions. Really.



Sent from my Galaxy Tab.
« Last Edit: November 16, 2014, 03:36:02 PM by fuzzy »
BROWNIE==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits Welcome to  the Sharing Economy w/ BeyondBitcoin.org Partners--ShareBits.io & OpenLedger.info
TIP FORMAT: #sharebits "ForumHandleInQuotes" Quanity Token_Name

zerosum

  • Guest
Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #7 on: November 17, 2014, 06:05:53 AM »
I consider this model screwed up.

Let's talk about the very last development.

The *Fisherman* donates to you 1mil PLAY tokens.

You are more than happy to promote him because of that.... And you just do not care if he screwed up the biggest believers in BTS/DPOS.

So, I have to donate the same amount to get the same exposure? I do not care about such system.
I have nobody  to screw up for 50 Mill, so I cannot donate 1mill to you;
So I am no good?...

Hope you get it TheNuts...

TK
« Last Edit: November 17, 2014, 06:07:58 AM by tonyk2 »

Offline fuzzy

Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #8 on: November 17, 2014, 06:26:29 AM »
I consider this model screwed up.

Let's talk about the very last development.

The *Fisherman* donates to you 1mil PLAY tokens.

You are more than happy to promote him because of that.... And you just do not care if he screwed up the biggest believers in BTS/DPOS.

So, I have to donate the same amount to get the same exposure? I do not care about such system.
I have nobody  to screw up for 50 Mill, so I cannot donate 1mill to you;
So I am no good?...

Hope you get it TheNuts...

TK

In the middle of finishing editing the bitshares PLAY hangout.  I'll get back to you after I'm done working on it. 
« Last Edit: November 17, 2014, 06:35:19 AM by fuzzy »
BROWNIE==DKP; BitShares is our Community! 
ShareBits Welcome to  the Sharing Economy w/ BeyondBitcoin.org Partners--ShareBits.io & OpenLedger.info
TIP FORMAT: #sharebits "ForumHandleInQuotes" Quanity Token_Name

Offline FreeTrade

  • Board Moderator
  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 700
    • View Profile
Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #9 on: November 17, 2014, 06:44:45 AM »
Quote
I have also kicked around the idea of offering a limited number of sponsored slots in this slate.

This is completely contrary to the idea that slate recommendations should comprise an unbiased assessment and set of recommendations by the reviewer. Open to all kinds of abuse in my opinion.


+1

Provide a slate by all means, and vote for your own paid delegate on that slate as compensation for the effort of maintaining a slate.

Run another paid delegate to compensate you for dev hangouts, and the community can decide to finance/reward that effort too. Add that delegate to your slate too - no problem as long as it is transparent.

But don't ask for a portion of someone else's delegate pay when you're voting for them on a slate. That looks too much like a kickback, and even if it doesn't start out that way, that's what it'll turn into. I won't vote for any whose behaviour could be confused with taking or encouraging kickbacks, and I won't add them to my slate.
 
“People should be more sophisticated? How are you gonna get that done?” - Jerry Seinfeld reply to Bill Maher

zerosum

  • Guest
Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #10 on: November 17, 2014, 07:16:32 AM »
Quote
I have also kicked around the idea of offering a limited number of sponsored slots in this slate.

This is completely contrary to the idea that slate recommendations should comprise an unbiased assessment and set of recommendations by the reviewer. Open to all kinds of abuse in my opinion.


+1

Provide a slate by all means, and vote for your own paid delegate on that slate as compensation for the effort of maintaining a slate.

Run another paid delegate to compensate you for dev hangouts, and the community can decide to finance/reward that effort too. Add that delegate to your slate too - no problem as long as it is transparent.

But don't ask for a portion of someone else's delegate pay when you're voting for them on a slate. That looks too much like a kickback, and even if it doesn't start out that way, that's what it'll turn into. I won't vote for any whose behaviour could be confused with taking or encouraging kickbacks, and I won't add them to my slate.

As much as I disagree with how the above poster does stuff ( as in starting his own POW coin, having a ridiculous 15% rake on his gaming coin... and finally abandoning it just because he feels so)

I  agree with him on this issue - start a delegate that pays for the stuff you do... you supporting 'slate / mlates'  does not only sound scammy...at the end of the day it is...

I will not and I should not vote for a delegate just because he supports you or other great causes... To say nothing that some  of those projects are included just because they provided funding... funding taken out of my own pocket as is the case with PLAY...

Offline btswildpig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1423
    • View Profile
Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #11 on: November 17, 2014, 07:17:06 AM »
I consider this model screwed up.

Let's talk about the very last development.

The *Fisherman* donates to you 1mil PLAY tokens.

You are more than happy to promote him because of that.... And you just do not care if he screwed up the biggest believers in BTS/DPOS.

So, I have to donate the same amount to get the same exposure? I do not care about such system.
I have nobody  to screw up for 50 Mill, so I cannot donate 1mill to you;
So I am no good?...

Hope you get it TheNuts...

TK

OMG...tonyK , you still on this topic ?

I hate to break this to you , even if the original plan wasn't going to give share to the Long and Short orders , the 35% for BTS is still the same , just divided by different BTSer . So , if you think someone's benefiting from the original plan , it wasn't fuzz , it was the other BTSer who didn't long and short . The 35% for BTS is still the same amount no matter the plan allocate the 35% to whom.

If somehow it was stealing (which it wasn't) , it was one BTSer to another BTSer , not to fuzz .

So , would you please let Fuzz off the hook ?
这个是私人账号,表达的一切言论均不代表任何团队和任何人。This is my personal account , anything I said with this account will be my opinion alone and has nothing to do with any group.

zerosum

  • Guest
Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #12 on: November 17, 2014, 07:23:58 AM »
I consider this model screwed up.

Let's talk about the very last development.

The *Fisherman* donates to you 1mil PLAY tokens.

You are more than happy to promote him because of that.... And you just do not care if he screwed up the biggest believers in BTS/DPOS.

So, I have to donate the same amount to get the same exposure? I do not care about such system.
I have nobody  to screw up for 50 Mill, so I cannot donate 1mill to you;
So I am no good?...

Hope you get it TheNuts...

TK

OMG...tonyK , you still on this topic ?

I hate to break this to you , even if the original plan wasn't going to give share to the Long and Short orders , the 35% for BTS is still the same , just divided by different BTSer . So , if you think someone's benefiting from the original plan , it wasn't fuzz , it was the other BTSer who didn't long and short . The 35% for BTS is still the same amount no matter the plan allocate the 35% to whom.

If somehow it was stealing (which it wasn't) , it was one BTSer to another BTSer , not to fuzz .

So , would you please let Fuzz off the hook ?

Right WildPid,
It is still the same:

Great believers: 0%
Average holders: +500%

AS long as those 2 categories add up to 100% we are fine? NO?

OK if not the stolen funds (or at least 1% of them are donated to fuzz to make this allocation sound GREAAAAT)

PS
Do not play dump WildPig, you know full well what is going on.
« Last Edit: November 17, 2014, 07:30:23 AM by tonyk2 »

Offline btswildpig

  • Hero Member
  • *****
  • Posts: 1423
    • View Profile
Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #13 on: November 17, 2014, 07:31:14 AM »
I consider this model screwed up.

Let's talk about the very last development.

The *Fisherman* donates to you 1mil PLAY tokens.

You are more than happy to promote him because of that.... And you just do not care if he screwed up the biggest believers in BTS/DPOS.

So, I have to donate the same amount to get the same exposure? I do not care about such system.
I have nobody  to screw up for 50 Mill, so I cannot donate 1mill to you;
So I am no good?...

Hope you get it TheNuts...

TK

OMG...tonyK , you still on this topic ?

I hate to break this to you , even if the original plan wasn't going to give share to the Long and Short orders , the 35% for BTS is still the same , just divided by different BTSer . So , if you think someone's benefiting from the original plan , it wasn't fuzz , it was the other BTSer who didn't long and short . The 35% for BTS is still the same amount no matter the plan allocate the 35% to whom.

If somehow it was stealing (which it wasn't) , it was one BTSer to another BTSer , not to fuzz .

So , would you please let Fuzz off the hook ?

Right WildPid,
It is still the same:
Great believers: 0%
Average holders: +500%

AS long as those 2 categories add up to 100% we are fine? NO?

Not the same ..... because you are still drilling on the 1 million Fuzz got , which is irrelevant...... You should drill on those BTSer who got the 500% in the original plan , leave Fuzz out of this .

You're doing the wrong math . If the original plan was to allocate 35% to BTS and then take the longer and shorter their shares to give Fuzz , then you can drill on Fuzz . But it wasn't the case . So , are you feeling clear now ?
这个是私人账号,表达的一切言论均不代表任何团队和任何人。This is my personal account , anything I said with this account will be my opinion alone and has nothing to do with any group.

zerosum

  • Guest
Re: Delegate Sponsorships
« Reply #14 on: November 17, 2014, 07:34:58 AM »
I consider this model screwed up.

Let's talk about the very last development.

The *Fisherman* donates to you 1mil PLAY tokens.

You are more than happy to promote him because of that.... And you just do not care if he screwed up the biggest believers in BTS/DPOS.

So, I have to donate the same amount to get the same exposure? I do not care about such system.
I have nobody  to screw up for 50 Mill, so I cannot donate 1mill to you;
So I am no good?...

Hope you get it TheNuts...

TK

OMG...tonyK , you still on this topic ?

I hate to break this to you , even if the original plan wasn't going to give share to the Long and Short orders , the 35% for BTS is still the same , just divided by different BTSer . So , if you think someone's benefiting from the original plan , it wasn't fuzz , it was the other BTSer who didn't long and short . The 35% for BTS is still the same amount no matter the plan allocate the 35% to whom.

If somehow it was stealing (which it wasn't) , it was one BTSer to another BTSer , not to fuzz .

So , would you please let Fuzz off the hook ?

Right WildPid,
It is still the same:
Great believers: 0%
Average holders: +500%

AS long as those 2 categories add up to 100% we are fine? NO?

Not the same ..... because you are still drilling on the 1 million Fuzz got , which is irrelevant...... You should drill on those BTSer who got the 500% in the original plan , leave Fuzz out of this .

You're doing the wrong math . If the original plan was to allocate 35% to BTS and then take the longer and shorter their shares to give Fuzz , then you can drill on Fuzz . But it wasn't the case . So , are you feeling clear now ?

!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!WOW WOW WOW!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I never said fuzz got all the funds... Not even close to that!

I just said he was promoting the scam for 1% of the 'stolen' (aka wrongly distributed funds).

 And he was maid  saying 'All is good, all is great!' for a 1% of the 'inefficiently accounted for amount'
« Last Edit: November 17, 2014, 07:39:28 AM by tonyk2 »

 

Google+